<p>Clinton can do what poor pitiful George Bush cannot grasp - she can be disarming. He just looks like a fool. Clinton can have a poker face when she wants. She can look like she will bite your head off when she wants and she can look at you like she cares deeply when she wants and she has obviously mastered the “almost on the verge of tears but I can control it” look. I think she is a wonderful actor and I think that is a great skill for a president. I watched her in the debate as she watched Obama explain his comment about her being “likeable enough” and she looked like she really understood what he was saying - that she understood that he didn’t mean it the way it sounded. I almost expected her to pat his hand and tell him it was alright. Was she thinking that? I’m sure she was thinking about her next answer, but who cares? I think Obama can probably pull a good fake too. I think Edwards has a harder time - his eyes harden. McCain completely wears his emotions on his sleeve. Romney has only mastered smug. Huckabee has only mastered “Aw shucks, little ole me?” Thompson has mastered “I’m bored and you’re stupid.” Guiliani just always looks like he’s in over his head as he remembers 9/11 just a little too fondly. In a tough spot, I’d put Hillary in to negotiate.</p>
<p>The debate tonight…WOW! Where’s the popcorn?</p>
<p>Anyway recently I heard someone comment that Mrs. Clinton failed the DC Bar Exam back in the 70’s. Supposedly Carl Bernstein revealed it in his recent book about her. I know there are a lot of Clinton supporters here who know a lot about their candidate. Is this true? Anybody know?</p>
<p>Who cares?</p>
<p>I wish that those voted for Hillary in the primary because of her cry lose their voting rights.</p>
<p>cartera45: I agree; Hillary is a good actress. </p>
<p>However, I do think that John Edwards has performed the best in every single one of these debates, and most especially in tonight’s. If negotiation were the key criteria, I’d bet my life on him-- every time. And I also prefer a candidate I can read and whose face quite possibly matches what he or she is thinking, but that’s probably just me. ;)</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone who talks about Hillary “crying” has seen the actual moment either live on TV or on video.</p>
<p>===</p>
<p>I also thought Edwards looked good tonight. It’s an example of the paradigm that when A & B are fighting, C looks good.</p>
<p>But as someone observed, nobody directs fire at you when you’re out of the race and in that regard he had an easier time of it. If he doesn’t win SC…and I don’t expect him to…his goose is cooked for the second election cycle in a row. I think he made a mistake by not taking on Obama early on: there was room for only one candidate in the ecological niche labeled “anti-Hillary, anti-Establishment” and Obama seized it early on and never let go.</p>
<p>My opinion of Obama has actually ratcheted down the past few weeks. If he can’t handle Hillary playing hardball, he certainly can’t handle what the Republican noise machine will generate towards the eventual nominee. And I want a hands-on president, not someone who convenes advisors to give him direction…I thought Hillary was at her best tonight on the wonkish policy questions. I think Obama’s notions of “post-partisanship” are naive but Clinton’s experience in negotiating across the aisle in the Senate will be very useful. Imo, she may not be as warm and fuzzy as Bill but I’m beginning to think she’ll be a much better political negotiator. Funny that…the health care fiasco might have been a real learning experience.</p>
<p>===</p>
<p>NEM: well, yeah, I guess I should have slowed down and figured. But the question of “why Hillary?” had been on my mind anyway. I’m thinking of writing a bloggish article for one venue or another, outlining the process behind arriving at my choice.</p>
<p>===</p>
<p>Re the Republicans: not only do I not have a clue, even the Republicans I know aren’t unified around any particular candidate. McCain seems to be inspiring support that’s pretty tepid.</p>
<p>I think Would-Be Ayahtollah Huckabee, who wants to make the Constitution conform to God’s Law, may have freaked out even part of his natural base with that comment.
I’m trying to figure where Huckabee and Thompson supporters go and the answer comes, “Crystal ball hazy, call back later.”</p>
<p>
If you’d read Clinton’s 2003 autobiography you’d know she revealed it HERSELF. No secret.</p>
<p>TheDad: Frankly, I think C has always looked good; Edwards is the best debater, and he has always (from early on) been definitive and focused on the issues and his plans to deal with those issues. I can’t say the same for the other two.</p>
<p>The problem Edwards has had all along in this campaign is the fact that he’s a white male running against a woman and a black male. It’s as simple as that. The media loves that and played to it last night. Honestly, I wondered more than once if Hillary’s and Obama’s fights last night were staged. They almost looked like it to me. It sure made for good TV (especially with the writers’ strike going on). The media loves this, and they’ve always covered the two of them. Even after Edwards came in second in Iowa, the media didn’t give him credit for that and pretty much glossed over that win. </p>
<p>Gender and race are driving this election cycle, not the issues. That’s a tough act to follow for Edwards, but I still believe he is THE best candidate, by far. Read his stance on the issues, and then try to figure out what Obama and Hillary are up to. Once again, if McCain wins the Republican nomination, Obama is toast, and Hillary will have a very tough row to hoe. She does not come across well in these debates, in my opinion, which was especially evident last night. She also has way too much baggage. If she gets this nomination, I cringe at the thought of her up against the beloved war veteran, McCain. If that happens, I honestly believe we’ll have another 4 years, at least, of a Republican president gung-ho on staying in this war. Then we can surely kiss good-by to anything else on the table (health care, education, a decent economy, etc).</p>
<p>Where will Bill fit in the HRC administration? Who will take the Veep position BEHIND Bill? When HRC was “in the Clinton adminstration”, she was not privy to all that was going on, but Bill will be and will put his 2cents in and really become a co-president/former-president. Will there be lamps thrown?</p>
<p>Good question. ^ I certainly voted for Bill Clinton, but now I think there’s something a bit unsettling about Hillary, and about the 2 of them running-- which is what this is (a twofer). My problem with Hillary is one of trust. Though I do think she’s very smart and capable, I just don’t trust her.</p>
<p>Janie, just out of curiosity, do you work for the Edwards campaign in some capacity? Like as a person who touts him on website forums? Your are so “go, go Edwards!!” that it seems like you’re on the payroll (or you should be;) - could this be a new career?)</p>
<p>ag54: Haha. Well, I have worked for his campaign, but only as a volunteer-- not on the payroll-- but yes, I’ll have to suggest that to someone there. ;)</p>
<p>No, I really do believe Edwards is the best of the three Democrats up there right now, and I always thought he stood the best chance of beating McCain (who will surely get the Republican nomination). He’s focused, knows how to fix this mess we’re in currently, and is smart and capable enough to succeed. I also trust him. He just can’t get past the media obsession with those two rock stars. It’s really a shame. Perhaps the only white male who could have posibly bypassed this whole gender/race thing is Al Gore. ??</p>
<p>Well he certainly looked like a mediator last night. What a row! It kind of got uncomfortable to watch and I don’t think it did much to help either of the front runners gain likeability or trust. </p>
<p>I’m one of those repubs who is thinking of switching (but only for this cycle;)), but I’m having a hard time getting over my distaste of ALL the candidates!</p>
<p>“I’m one of those repubs who is thinking of switching (but only for this cycle), but I’m having a hard time getting over my distaste of ALL the candidates!”</p>
<p>I’m not thinking of switching because I think the democrats are not what I’m looking for, but I have no candidate that I’m even remotely excited about. That old song “I’m not in love no no . . . .” keeps running through my head. Perhaps by the fall I will be.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s my hope as well, but each time I start to think I’m clicking with one, some nutty thing comes out about them and I’m back to square one…</p>
<p>The repubs are just sooo uninspiring, and frankly, I’ve lost hope that they believe what I believe…</p>
<p>Can I just move to New Zealand or somewhere? haha JK</p>
<p>Did anyone see the most awkward moment in campaign history - not sure I’m allowed to post this link, but I’ll give it a try. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/01/21/politics/fromtheroad/entry3734680.shtml[/url]”>http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/01/21/politics/fromtheroad/entry3734680.shtml</a></p>
<br>
<br>
<p>The Democrats always shoot themselves in the foot this way. They spend a year calling each other whores, liars, and thieves, and then stage a miraculous Coming Togther on the stage at the convention that nobody quite believes. They expect the voters to somehow forget all the nasty things they said about each other in the primaries and vote for the nominee. </p>
<p>The Republicans do a much better job of remaining halfway civil and not inflicting too many wounds on themselves leading to the convention. I wish the Democrats could learn to do the same.</p>
<p>Coureur, yep, the operative Democratic phrase is “circular firing squad.” </p>
<p>But if the general election is between Hillary and McCain, I think <em>both</em> sides are going to have some voters sitting on their hands. I read Republican websites (though I feel I need a toxic hazard suit at the time) and the feeling about McCain is not warm and fuzzy. </p>
<p>Moreover, I think a lot of ****ed off Democrats will ultimately come home. The Clintons have a deep reservoir of good will among the black community and the college-educated elites will stop and consider the Supreme Court. Plus I think turnout among women will be sky high.</p>
<p>I’ve been contemplating the question as to whether Clinton would pick–or be virtually forced to pick–Obama as her running mate. If so, and if they buried the hatchet, I think the turnout on the Democratic side will be sky high. And the Republicans seem as if they will be a largely dispirited bunch.</p>
<p>Well, Kennedy chose Johnson and they hated each other. Al Gore hates Bill Clinton. John Kerry and John Edwards hate each other. </p>
<p>We have precedent.</p>
<p>Of course, Hillary has to win first. 
Then Obama has to accept. If I was Obama, I wouldn’t accept.</p>
<p>George Bush and Dick Cheney like each other. Look where that has got us. :)</p>
<p>Can’t I just nominate and vote for Jed Bartlet and get it over with? Or even Matt Santos?</p>